feat(python): add user management methods to IggyClient by ethanlin01x · Pull Request #3695 · apache/iggy

ethanlin01x · 2026-07-17T15:32:00Z

Which issue does this PR address?

Rationale

Adds the missing user management operations to the Python SDK, which previously had no binding beyond login_user and forced callers to the CLI or another SDK to provision users.

What changed?

The Python SDK exposed no part of the Rust UserClient surface besides login_user, so users could not be listed, inspected, created, updated, or deleted from Python.

get_user, get_users, create_user, update_user, and delete_user now bind through to the Rust UserClient, and UserInfo, UserInfoDetails, and UserStatus are exposed as Python classes. As scoped in the issue, create_user always passes None for permissions; the Permissions mapping is left to a follow-up together with update_permissions, change_password, and logout_user.

Local Execution

Passed
Pre-commit hooks ran

AI Usage

Claude was used to help generate and review this PR and all the changes are checked by the human.

The Python bindings need these types to expose user management, but only UserStatus was re-exported so far.

These types are needed by the upcoming user management methods on IggyClient. Permissions stay unexposed for now, so UserInfoDetails carries the same fields as UserInfo until the follow-up that maps the Permissions structure.

Expose get_user, get_users, create_user, update_user and delete_user, wrapping the Rust SDK UserClient functions like the existing topic and consumer group bindings. create_user always passes no permissions; the Permissions type mapping is left to a follow-up together with update_permissions, change_password and logout_user.

Cover create, get, list, update and delete against a live server, including default status, inactive users, login with created credentials, numeric and name identifiers, repeated listing stability, and pre-connection and pre-authentication failures.

codecov · 2026-07-18T10:29:49Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 92.03540% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 72.11%. Comparing base (6f1d548) to head (da1d23a).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
foreign/python/src/user.rs	79.06%	9 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #3695      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     73.99%   72.11%   -1.89%     
  Complexity      937      937              
============================================
  Files          1301     1302       +1     
  Lines        147393   142232    -5161     
  Branches     122945   117748    -5197     
============================================
- Hits         109063   102567    -6496     
- Misses        34858    35892    +1034     
- Partials       3472     3773     +301

Components	Coverage Δ
Rust Core	`72.05% <ø> (-2.25%)`	⬇️
Java SDK	`62.44% <ø> (ø)`
C# SDK	`71.04% <ø> (-1.14%)`	⬇️
Python SDK	`92.15% <92.03%> (-0.02%)`	⬇️
PHP SDK	`84.29% <ø> (ø)`
Node SDK	`91.35% <ø> (+0.09%)`	⬆️
Go SDK	`42.87% <ø> (ø)`

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
foreign/python/src/client.rs	`99.11% <100.00%> (+0.11%)`	⬆️
foreign/python/src/lib.rs	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
foreign/python/src/user.rs	`79.06% <79.06%> (ø)`

... and 140 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

ethanlin01x · 2026-07-18T17:40:04Z

The 3 lines Codecov flags as uncovered in foreign/python/src/user.rs are the #[pyclass(...)] and #[pymethods] attribute lines. They are not missing tests. All hand-written logic in the file is fully exercised by tests/test_user.py.

Should these attribute lines be brought to 100% as well, or is it fine to leave them as is?

slbotbm · 2026-07-19T08:09:47Z

The 3 lines Codecov flags as uncovered in foreign/python/src/user.rs are the #[pyclass(...)] and #[pymethods] attribute lines. They are not missing tests. All hand-written logic in the file is fully exercised by tests/test_user.py.
Should these attribute lines be brought to 100% as well, or is it fine to leave them as is?

Fine as it is

slbotbm · 2026-07-19T09:04:16Z

Also, please do commit the new changes as new commits. This will help me in understanding what changed after my review.

slbotbm · 2026-07-19T09:13:10Z

/author

Server error messages are not a stable contract and created_at is server generated, so assert neither.

Replace the hardcoded nonexistent id with a freshly vacated one, drop the repeated get_users snapshot comparison that other clients can invalidate, and assert the strictly ascending id order instead.

The server validates username and password length in bytes (3-50 and 3-100 respectively), not characters. Exercise both bounds for create_user and update_user, including multibyte credentials that fit the byte limits and ones that exceed them while staying within the character count.

Inactive and deleted users cannot log in, invalid identifiers fail client-side without a server round trip, an update with no fields is accepted as a noop, and deletion covers root protection, double deletion, removal from listings, live session behavior, and username reuse with fresh credentials.

ethanlin01x · 2026-07-19T10:53:20Z

/ready

slbotbm · 2026-07-20T17:02:11Z

+            )
+
+    @pytest.mark.asyncio
+    async def test_create_user_password_limit_is_bytes_not_characters(


This test is not required

Removed, 198274a

slbotbm · 2026-07-20T17:02:27Z

+        ids=["japanese-51-bytes", "emoji-52-bytes"],
+    )
+    @pytest.mark.asyncio
+    async def test_create_user_username_limit_is_bytes_not_characters(


This as well

Removed 198274a

slbotbm · 2026-07-20T17:11:37Z

+        assert username not in [user.username for user in users]
+
+    @pytest.mark.asyncio
+    async def test_deleted_user_live_session_loses_identity(


This test does not prove its claim:

get_user(username) is None only proves deleted target no longer resolves.

get_users() already fails before deletion because user has no permissions.

Test still passes if deleted session remains authenticated.

Let's comment this out and add a todo to uncomment once permission management is added to python sdk

Thanks, you're right. Reduced it to a no-op with a TODO to restore once permission management lands in the Python SDK (a9bb97b). Kept the function and docstring so the intent stays visible.

Without permission management in the Python SDK, this test passes even if the deleted session stays authenticated, so it cannot prove its claim. Reduce it to a no-op with a TODO to restore later.

ethanlin01x · 2026-07-20T17:33:50Z

/ready

ethanlin01x force-pushed the feat/python-sdk-user-management branch from 321886e to 6fec2bc Compare July 17, 2026 15:44

ethanlin01x added 4 commits July 17, 2026 23:46

feat(sdk): export UserInfo and UserInfoDetails from prelude

4828ca4

The Python bindings need these types to expose user management, but only UserStatus was re-exported so far.

ethanlin01x force-pushed the feat/python-sdk-user-management branch from 6fec2bc to 7e57428 Compare July 17, 2026 15:51

ethanlin01x marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2026 15:53

github-actions Bot added the S-waiting-on-review PR is waiting on a reviewer label Jul 17, 2026

slbotbm requested changes Jul 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot added S-waiting-on-author PR is waiting on author response and removed S-waiting-on-review PR is waiting on a reviewer labels Jul 19, 2026

ethanlin01x added 4 commits July 19, 2026 17:58

test(python): drop brittle assertions in user tests

3d899e7

Server error messages are not a stable contract and created_at is server generated, so assert neither.

test(python): make user tests deterministic on shared servers

d41fb76

Replace the hardcoded nonexistent id with a freshly vacated one, drop the repeated get_users snapshot comparison that other clients can invalidate, and assert the strictly ascending id order instead.

ethanlin01x requested a review from slbotbm July 19, 2026 10:53

github-actions Bot added S-waiting-on-review PR is waiting on a reviewer and removed S-waiting-on-author PR is waiting on author response labels Jul 19, 2026

slbotbm requested changes Jul 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot added S-waiting-on-author PR is waiting on author response and removed S-waiting-on-review PR is waiting on a reviewer labels Jul 20, 2026

test(python): drop redundant byte-limit user tests

198274a

ethanlin01x force-pushed the feat/python-sdk-user-management branch from cabfe1e to 198274a Compare July 20, 2026 17:19

test(python): disable unprovable deleted-session test

a9bb97b

Without permission management in the Python SDK, this test passes even if the deleted session stays authenticated, so it cannot prove its claim. Reduce it to a no-op with a TODO to restore later.

ethanlin01x force-pushed the feat/python-sdk-user-management branch from 881270f to a9bb97b Compare July 20, 2026 17:28

ethanlin01x requested a review from slbotbm July 20, 2026 17:33

github-actions Bot added S-waiting-on-review PR is waiting on a reviewer and removed S-waiting-on-author PR is waiting on author response labels Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Conversation

ethanlin01x commented Jul 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Which issue does this PR address?

Rationale

What changed?

Local Execution

AI Usage

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 18, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x commented Jul 18, 2026

Uh oh!

slbotbm commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

slbotbm commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

slbotbm commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

slbotbm Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

slbotbm Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

slbotbm Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ethanlin01x commented Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

ethanlin01x commented Jul 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jul 18, 2026 •

edited

Loading